1. INTRODUCTION
⌅The role of the technique and his influence in the architectural field at the beginning of the 20th century has been considered to reflect on how architects experienced a change of attitude and accepted his responsibility in a task in which new variables came into action.
During the previous centuries, the
machines had been emerged, but they were incapable of making the
decisive changes to conceive the new society characterized by the
industrialization. The new advances and the technical possibilities were
not yet expressed in the architecture of that time. It was an
architecture anchored in the past; an architecture unable to reflect the
Zeitgeist. On the contrary, the engineering works, as Muthesius
already had said in his intervention in the VI International Congress of
Architects that took place in Madrid in 1904, reflected the progress of
the industry as early as the second half of the 19th century. A few
days later, Berlage also said, referring to the aforementioned Muthesius
conference, that the progress of architecture should be entrusted to
the application of recent industry achievements and to constructive
logic (1(1)
Pozo, J.M. (2000). Madrid: 1904: dos arquitectos en busca de un estilo.
Intervenciones de Berlage y Muthesius en el VI Congreso Internacional
de Arquitectos. RA, Revista de Arquitectura, vol.4, 67-74.
).
In
this context, Exhibitions were a singular event as a showcase for the
technological advances produced in the fervent emerging industrial
sector. The Universal Exhibitions took place mainly in the second half
of the 19th century. In 1881 it was held in London. For this
occasion, the admired Crystal Palace was built, whose originality did
not lie in the materials used or in the resolutions of the vault, but in
the “new relationship established between the technical means and the
(…) expressive aims of the building” (2(2) Benévolo, L. (1971). History of modern architecture. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.
).
In 1889, after having been organized innumerable exhibitions in
different European and American cities, one of the most impactful events
due to the construction of the Galerie des Machines and the Tour Eiffel
took place in Paris. Both constructions were a clear manifestation of
the possibilities offered by the technique and of the way in which the
engineers knew how to use it with great mastery.
The new materials
and the progress achieved after the Industrial Revolution favored the
development towards modernity initiated by engineers, through the
construction of large pavilions, passages, galleries, bridges, so
snatching the hegemony that the architect had sustained until that
moment. It took time for Architecture to react, while engineering works
already showed without complexes the possibilities offered by technique.
As Gideon explained, “construction is unconsciously moving towards
aesthetic sensibilities feeling which did not find their equivalents in
art and architecture until decades later” (3(3) Giedion, S. (1954). Space, time and architecture: the growth of new tradition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
).
In this depressing atmosphere, deprived of all creative spirit, Henry
Petrus Berlage was able to see beyond and build a construction that
marked the future of 20th century architecture. Opposed to
“fake” architecture, in which the general trend was imitation, with the
construction of Amsterdam Stock Exchange he managed to defeat the
prevailing eclecticism and materialize a building in which he chose to
show with shameless sincerity the way in which it had been built. Using
brick as the main material, the load-bearing structure exhibited without
complexes the path that the loads followed through the walls in a bare
space that stood out for its compositions based on pure volumes.
This
path of purification had been initiated previously in North America.
There formal simplicity prevailed in every production process, from
household tools and utensils, whose shape was indebted to the material
and techniques used and which responded to the function for which they
were created, to imposing industrial buildings. An it was there, in the
United States, where a new way of manufacturing based on mass production
emerged a few years later, which was a revolution at the time. Henry
Ford, influenced by ideas of Frederick W. Taylor and of Frank B.
Gilbreth was the one who popularized manufacturing through the assembly
line in the automotive industry. A way of producing through the assembly
line that inevitably influenced the internal organization of the
factory itself, modifying their configuration, as a result of close
collaboration between architects and engineers, such as that carried out
by Albert Kahn in Highland Park for Henry Ford in 1909. In Europe,
Germany was one of the countries where the principles of Taylorism and
Fordism were subsequently applied more intensely in the field of
industry, in general, and construction, in particular, promoting mass
production and standardization in order to achieve an improvement in
productivity (4(4) Guillén, M. F. (2009). La disciplinada belleza de lo mecánico. El taylorismo y el nacimiento de la arquitectura moderna. Madrid: Modus Laborandi.
).
European architects were fascinated by American technique. However, they considered it anonymous so they wanted to add the Kunstform to the Technikform.
That is to say, “Americanism, characterized by the affirmation of
technology, of perfect rationalization and absolute modernity, should
therefore be ennobled by European culture, following the rules of the Werkbund” (5(5) Nerdinger, W. (1988). Walter Gropius. Opera completa. Milano: editorial Electa.
), whose principles would continue in the Staatliches Bauhaus
by Walter Gropius, where art and industry merge, which is in essence,
architecture and technique. In that context, Peter Behrens, for
instance, defended the fusion of art, as intuition and psychic impulse (Kunstwollen),
with technique, understood as a tool and not as an ultimate goal, in
the conception of any object, be it a work of engineering or a product
obtained from industry. In this way, he was looking for new forms that
reflected the new spirit of the time and were capable of expressing the
very nature of the object. However, the general trend was not yet to
project considering the constructive aspects and their influence on the
final form. In fact, as M.A. del Val exposes, the mistake of
dissociating the constructive criteria from the aesthetic ones, in other
ways, emancipating or detaching the technique from the forma, referring
them to two different spheres of architecture as if they were
independent of each other, had its peak 1929 around to what happened in
the controversial contest for the Headquarters of the League of Nations.
The victory of an academicism that was in its last days generated a
confrontation between two sides (6(6) Alonso del Val, M.A., Suárez Mansilla, L., Glaría Yetano, F. and Larripa Artieda, V. (2012). Elementos de arquitectura: pensar y construir el proyecto. Huarte: Ulzama
). As Christian Zervos points out in the manifesto published in the Cahiers d’art, “it is about struggle between the old and the modern” (7(7) Zervos, Ch. (1993). ¿Quién construirá el palacio de las naciones de Ginebra? 3ZU: revista d’arquitectura, nº1, 62 - 77.
),
of the attempt to perpetuate tradition with progress, of the ghosts
rooted in bourgeois eclecticism against the prevailing spirit of the New
Architecture that was been born for the people. Despite the triumph
(first prize ex-aecquo) of the project carried out by the Jeanneret
cousins, as well as the third prizes obtained by Hannes Meyer, finally
the dispute was settled with the construction of a building that nothing
responded to what was happening in the society of the moment.
Although in the exposed example they suffered a controversial failure, the project criteria used by the architects assigned to progress (rationalization of space, use of standardized construction systems, elimination of superfluous, use of scientific parameters, as well as the consideration of the function of the building) were gradually managing to imposed themselves as principles of nascent architecture, given the evidence of the paradigm shifts that were taking place. It was the dawn of the twentieth century, years in which the break was evident between the architects adhering to the formalist side of architecture versus those who were fierce defenders of the role of construction, when the predominating voices who considered that any self-imposed formal limitation should be overcome, emerged, proclaiming the interaction between the two.
Technique and aesthetics became two
complementary and coexisting facets of the same intellectual process.
The tectonic dimension of architecture took on the leading role;
construction found its rightful place in the creative facet and became
leading character within the final configuration of the project and its
materialization (8(8) Framton, K. (1995). Studies of Tectonic Culture: The Poetics of Construction in Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Architecture. Cambridge - London: The MIT Press.
). As stated by M.A. del Val (6(6) Alonso del Val, M.A., Suárez Mansilla, L., Glaría Yetano, F. and Larripa Artieda, V. (2012). Elementos de arquitectura: pensar y construir el proyecto. Huarte: Ulzama
):
The construction is thus configured as a component of first magnitude (…) to such an extent that it can be said that a project does not exist if it does not contemplate its own realization.
That is why there cannot and should not be a confrontation between form and construction, because both are adjusted from the beginning of the project through a relationship with the technique that endows architectural arguments with the stability with which reality presents what is necessary and not random.
Thus, at a time characterized by the great
technological and scientific advances that have taken place, these had,
without doubt, also an enormous impact on the architectural discourse
and on the materialization of ideas itself. Further, using again the
words of M.A. del Val (6(6) Alonso del Val, M.A., Suárez Mansilla, L., Glaría Yetano, F. and Larripa Artieda, V. (2012). Elementos de arquitectura: pensar y construir el proyecto. Huarte: Ulzama
),
“it is necessary to note that a return to construction does not mean
the simple gathering of diverse materials (… and that) construction
should be valued as a projective discipline and technique as a real
control of design”. That is, the execution of project ideas must be
considered as an opportunity to enrich the discourse and be used,
therefore, as a creative tool with which to develop architectural
projects.
2. CASE STUDIES
⌅The
new paradigms caused by the irruption of industrialization and the
application of science, especially mathematics and physics, affected
“both to the very conception of architecture as well as to the entire
process of its realization (design and material), introducing as a
priority value of this thought the norm of efficiency” (9(9) Calduch, J. (2001). Materia y técnica: de la firmitas a la tecnología. San Vicente (Alicante): Editorial club universitario.
), that is, “the search for maximum benefit from minimum cost in the construction or in the workings of the buildings” (10(10)
Tzonis, A. & Lefaivre, L. (1984). La mecanización de la
arquitectura y la doctrina funcionalista. En: Fernández-Galiano, L.
(coord.). Arquitectura, técnica y naturaleza en el ocaso de la modernidad. Madrid: Monografías del M.O.P.U., 27-56.
). This is what is known as Sachlichkeit or objectivity, referring to “any concept in which a work is implicitly carried out with accuracy” (11(11)
Behne, A. (1984). Eine Studen Architektur. IV Von der Sachlichkeit.
Prólogo del libro: Taut, M. Bauten und Pläne. Belin: Archibook-Verlag.
Citado en: García Roig, J.M. (2012). La Sachlichkeit. Origen y
desarrollo del concepto. Sachlichkeit y el proyecto de arquitectura. Colección de textos dispersos, nº4. Madrid: Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 13 -18. Recuperado de: http://polired.upm.es/index.php/textosdispersos/article/view/1834
). These paradigms were mainly responsible for the
change produced in the approach when facing the architectural project,
analyzed from two different scopes and both related to the tectonic
dimension for architecture: on the one hand, production and, on the
other hand, organization.
Throughout this research, it has been investigated how, from the new ways of producing and organizing, new strategies have appeared that have influenced in different aspects of architecture: Form, Structure, Material, Component, Space, Function. Their most important characteristic is that all have a relationship with a new way of working that was still generally limited to a simple intuition of what be done, considering that incipient technology was still at the embryonic stage. Experimenting was the principal way of tackling uncertainty for someone who trusted their instinct as opposed to following certainties, far from travelling along the safe path of tried and tested methods.
The strategies identified have been: Reproduction, Liking, Manufacture, Assembly, Tuning, Gearing; each of these is a consequence of a change in paradigm. And the buildings considered as case studies, in regard to the aforementioned strategies, have been: Stahlhaus (1926, Georg Muche and Richard Paulick), Mobilar Structure (1939, Konrad Wachsmann), Maison du Peuple (1935, Jean Prouvé), Plywood Model House (1936, Richard J. Neutra), Chauffeur’s House (1927, Gerrit Th. Rietveld), General Motors Suïsse assembly factory (1936, Rudolf Steiger).
It is necessary to highlight that the selected projects have been chosen for their characteristics that make them pioneers within the corresponding approach to which they refer, giving preference to second-rank projects within the Architectural History to vindicate their importance. It is also necessary to emphasize that the important thing in this research is not the projects themselves, but the strategies used in them, so that other could have been used instead.
All the works correspond to the same space of time, considered the years 1923 and 1945 as a turning point. The choice of these dates corresponds to events of certain significance within architectural history. 1923, the year in which the experimental house Haus am Horn was built at the Bauhaus, can be recognized as the beginning of the application of industrialization on the architectural field. On the other hand, in 1945 dates the beginning of John Entenza’s program, Case Study Houses, at which time the architecture of the beginning of the century had already reached its fullness. These years therefore mark a period in which the importance of the projects lies in their precursor character at a time when the technique still offered few possibilities, compared to those belonging to the second modernity or orthodoxy, in which it was finally able to confirm the insights put into practice in previous decades. The difference between the projects of one period and the other one is found in the initiating and experimental nature of the former, which represented a true break with previous tradition, as opposed to the continuing character of the latter.
2.1. Form: Typified reproduction (Stahlhaus)
⌅The shortage of housing was one of the main problems at the beginning of the 20th
century when, Walter Gropius, thanks to a commission to build
accommodation for the working class in Dessau, was able to put into
practice his ideas on rationalization, standardization and mass
production. These were principles which until that moment he had not
been able to carry out, but he had been developing and perfecting over
the years in different texts and theoretical proposals1Some
of them were: Programma zur Gründung einer allgemeinen
Hausbaugesekkschaft auf künstlerisch einheitlicher Grundlage, m.b.H.
(1910), Wabenbau (1922), Buakasten im Großen (1923)..
The methodology used in the construction of these dwellings cannot
really be considered as a novel method nor can it be said that it would
mean a great advance in the world of prefabrication. However, as Herbert
stated, “the concepts of standardization, mass production,
specialization of labor, mechanization of operation and rigorously
planned organization of labor and materials, which are the
characteristic features of the industrial system” appear here and it
allowed a reduction in the construction time (12(12) Herbert, G. (1984). “The Dream of the Factory-made House”. Walter Gropius and Konrad Wachsmann. Cambridge - London: The MIT Press.
).
In 1925, simultaneously with the construction of the first phase of the Siedlung Dessau-Törten, a steel house (Stahlhaus)
designed by Georg Muche and Richard Paulick was built. This was done as
an experiment for the inauguration of the new Bauhaus headquarters in
Dessau. The principles used were those of the Bauhaus workshops, where
the concept of handwork and industrial production were closely related.
It was necessary to first discover the object-type that would fulfill
the initial premises in such a way that it could subsequently be
produced in large quantities by the industry. That is to say, artisanal
activity ceased to be and end in itself and became a method of learning
for the individual (13(13) Gropius, W. (1924). Die allgemeinen Produktionsgrundsätze des Staatliche Bauhauses in Weimar. Berlin: Bauhaus-Archiv. Unpublished manuscript.
).
The Stahlhaus (fig. 01)
was projected as a typified reproducible artefact whose shape was a
conjunction of its functionality, the used technique and economy. A way
of doing that had been already used, for example, by Alma
Siedhoff-Buscher in her children’s furniture (14(14) Von Siebenbrodt, M. (2004). Alma Siedhoff-Buscher. Eine neue Welt für Kinder. Weimar: Bauhaus Museum Kunstammlungen zu Weimar.
). Shape, like style, was replaced by the search of the essence, the Wesenforschung. In this way, the maximum simplicity to simplify the typing of the object for mass production was sought.
Stahlhaus
can be considered as a prototype realized to experience the
industrialized construction of houses using prefabricated elements (15(15)
Seelow, A. M. (2018). The Construction Kit and the Assembly Line -
Walter Gropius. Concepts for Rationalazing Architecture. Arts, 7 (4) 95. doi: 10.3390/arts7040095
). For the execution, Muche and Paulick proposed
their own constructive method based on special cross-sectional profiles
and standardized components. However, finally, it was decided to use the
standardized construction system of the company Carl Käster a.g. (16(16) Weztel, H. (2004). Das Stahlhaus in der Siedlung Törten und anderer Stahlhäuser in Mitteldeutschland. Dessau Kalender 2004. Heimatliches Jahrbuch für Dessau und Umgebung (pp.2-17). Dessau: Dessau o. V. Verlag.
).
The main achievement was the creation of an object built by mechanized techniques and with easily reproducible final form, which represented the essence of the intrinsic qualities related to its function and the building method used. And, consequently, it had an innovative aesthetic that had nothing to do with what was done so far. The dwelling thus became an industrialized consumption product, i.e. the final commodity within the productions process. It was studied to guarantee its efficiency, quality and economy. It had become a typified object with a considerably reduced final cost, since it was being mass produced and sold in large quantities, in the same way as Ford Model-T cars.
2.2. Structure: Three-dimensional mass production (Mobilar Structure)
⌅The development of three-dimensional frameworks took place, initially, in the world of civil engineering due to the need to solve greater distances between supports and to withstand much higher loads. These were structures that had evolved from initial configuration of two-dimensional elements repeated successively by configuring a framework whose static behavior could be calculated in easier ways either by graphic or numerical methods.
It’s important also
mention that, in 1903, Alexander Graham Bell had already published a
text in which he showed his experiments on three-dimensional kites and
his conviction about the importance that the structural shape had in the
stability and resistance in this kind of structures made with
tetrahedrons (17(17) Graham Bell, A. (1903). Tetrahedral principle in kite structure. National Geografic Magazine, XIV.6, 219-251. Recuperado de: https://www.loc.gov/resource/magbell.37700202/?sp=3
). In fact, Konrad Wachsmann, a self-taught German
architect, recognized Graham Bell as a pioneer in the mass production
of standardized tetrahedrons prefabricated from metal bars with which he
obtained very simple three-dimensional kite-structures whose
construction would have been much more complex if it had been made using
conventional means (18(18) Wachsmann, K. (1975). Una svolta nelle costruzioni. Milano: Il Saggiatore.
).
Wachsmann put these ideas into practice by developing some projects, such as the well-known Packaged House System and others like the Mobilar Structure
that evolved to the USAF hangars, once in the USA. These projects were
generated from a three-dimensional modulation, under a spatial
conception, which facilitated the use of standardized elements produced
in large quantities. Specifically, Mobilar Structure system can
be summed up “in a nodal point o connector where perpendicular lattices
converge with each other, and annexed surfaces that function as mobile
enclosures” (19(19) Arribas-Blanco, R. (2016). Jean Prouvé and Konrad wachsmann. Two ways of using the scale model as a tool for projecting. Proyecto, Progreso, Arquitectura. 15, 56-69.
)
and was conceived to use standardized elements with predefined
dimensions characterized an open-plan modulated space. The resulting
architecture was a three-dimensional construction that could be
indefinitely extended (fig. 02).
The hangar could have any dimension and shape, depending on the number
and position of modules used. The integral construction, consisting of a
continuous roof and mobile independent walls, was also designed along
with its disassembly and easy transportation. The connector was a
fundamental piece that acquired a double technical and aesthetic
function that, in a theoretical way, evokes Gottfried Semper’s knot. As
Wachsmann himself stated: “they are not only point of contact, but they
also describe with the greatest precision the object they surround; it
does not have only a determining aesthetic value, but they are the
result of technical functions and these have to be considered” (18(18) Wachsmann, K. (1975). Una svolta nelle costruzioni. Milano: Il Saggiatore.
).
With this way of proceeding, the project and building processes had to maintain a continuity and involved the use of scale models to give a better control of all the parts distributed around the space. The design of the connector and the tubular elements were the key to the project’s process, since success depended on them. They allowed the transformability of the construction and the joining of components, as well as guaranteeing a good static behavior.
These networks or
molecular structures based on the repetition of their “cells” can be
observed on some architecture whose morphology is a consequence of the
strength diagrams in their own structures and where stability is
achieved through the triangulation of their configuration. Constructions
in which the architectural form is identified with the structure. The
conjunction of bars from any spatial direction generated an isotropic
space. Constructions originated by means of spatial repetition that
followed a crystalline distribution. The result was “an ordered
structure that embodies the generating laws and the parts as a whole” (20(20) Olóriz, C. (2014). On the Search for Spatial Patterns: repetition as the Crystallization of a Design Method. MAS Context, 21. Recuperado de: http://www.mascontext.com/issues/21-repetition-spring-14/on-the-search-for-spatial-patterns-repetition-as-the-crystallization-of-a-design-method/
). That is, a three-dimensional construction that
is identified with macro-form and that, through the combination of
molecules or microforms, generated an architecture that was space in
itself, being the way in which these particles were arranged through
weaving the space what mattered (cause) and not the resulting form
(consequence). For Wachsmann it was more a matter of technology.
2.3. Material: Efficient production (Maison du Peuple)
⌅At the beginning of the 20th century the book “On Growth and Form” was published, which greatly influenced both artists and architects, as well as engineers and biologists. In this book D’Arcy Thompson argues that the form of living beings can be explained using mathematical and geometric concepts, as well as physical laws. He also linked the concept of efficiency defined by Galileo with the ‘structure’ of living beings, asserting that they adopt their most effective form depending on the efforts that they must endure. He continued with two issues that he considered of great importance and that were directly connected with the effectiveness of the structures. The first one consisted in how Nature arranges the material increasing the thickness of the section in those areas subject to the greatest tension, while reducing the section in the least requested areas. In the second question he explained that the traction and compression lines are identical and symmetrical between them, joining both systems to support the loads to which the corresponding section is subject. However, he claimed that it was also possible to weaken one of the systems as long as there was a compensation from another. As if, for example, we ran a rope with two distant points whose section presents all tension lines, but no compression ones. In this way the importance of the material and how it responds to the actions to which it is subjected based on the capacity it has to resist traction or compression was found.
Although there
have not been any direct references or testimonies that confirm that
Jean Prouvé knew of existence of this book, however, there are
statements made in first person in which the French constructor claimed
that his best source of information was found in the contemplation of
nature: “look, like the thumb to the hand. Everything is well done, it
is solid, they are form of equivalent resistance and, despite
everything. They are flexible” (21(21) Lavalou, A. (2006). Conversaciones con Jean Prouvé. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili.
).
Prouvé always spoke of equivalent resistance, without differentiating
whether the design corresponded to a piece of furniture or a building,
referring to the shape acquired by the objects that he projected and
constructed. It was the response to requests to which they were
subjected, being more resistant wherever that had to endure an effort.
An unquestionable similarity is reflected here between Prouvé’s
equivalent resistance and D’Arcy Thompson’s effective form.
The
professional training of Jean Prouvé was closely related to the making
of things. The design of furniture had a fundamental importance in the
evolution of his work, as it was already affirmed by A. Guiheuz (22(22) Guiheux, A. (1990). L’architecture inverse. En: Guidot, R. and Guiheux, A. (Eds.), Jean Prouvé constructeur. Paris: Editions du Centre Pompidou, p.35
) and N. Foster (23(23) Foster, N. (2011). Jean Prouvé: maestro de la forma estructural. AV Monografías, 149, 112.
).
In all his creations, regardless of the scale, he used the same logic
based on economy, constructive simplicity and material optimization. A
representative example is the way of configuring the top board of a
table whose resistant component coincides with that of Roland Garros Aeroclub’s roof in which the elements subjected to bending have greater magnitude. Or in the case of Maison du Peuple, which, as its author indicated, resembles “a kind of large stool” (21(21) Lavalou, A. (2006). Conversaciones con Jean Prouvé. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili.
).
This is one of the most important projects carried out by Jean Prouvé
during the 1930s in collaboration with the architects Beaudouin &
Lods and the engineer Vladimir Bodiansky. The folded sheet was the main
material that characterized the construction. This building was created
as a complete object and conceived from the overall efficiency of the
unit. This determined both the production method and, consequently, the
final shape (24(24) Coley, C. (1993). Jean Prouvé. París: Editions du Centre Pompidou.
). This can be observed in the envelope of this building. It evolved through different stages where the joint (fig. 03)
had a leading role. Jean Prouvé, using prototypes, designed several
alternatives. He worked the shape of the folded sheet to obtain a
solution that met all requirements, such as wind resistance and
preventing the entry of the water.
In this building everything was made to fit. Full scale prototypes fabricated with the same materials as the definitive parts were used to test the effectiveness of the system, as in the case of an automobile chassis or an aircraft fuselage. The architectural object was produced industrially, but not using industrialized components but by being manufactured like other industrial products, i.e. with the same variables of efficiency and economy that govern industrial production. The final shape of each elements was a consequence of the raw material selected for it. The material and its optimization were the protagonists in this project strategy.
2.4. Component: Adaptable assembly (Plywood Model House)
⌅In
a North American context, where industry was practically non-existent,
mechanization was introduced as a substitute for skilled labor, unlike
the way it did in Europe. The standardization of pieces was one of the
first consequences, which was, intimately related to the
interchangeability of the same. In the United States, the
commercialization of products also increased in the absence of the
limits established by customs. It can be relatively easy to imagine, in
this scenario, the impression he made on Richard Neutra an
“industrialized technology of the United States, exact but repetitive” (25(25) Neutra, R. (2013). Vida y Forma: Autobiografía de Richard Neutra. Los Angeles: Atara Press.
).
It
can be said that manufacturers of buildings components played a key
role in the development of architecture in the early twentieth century
in the US, in this framework, it is inevitable to mention the popular
American publication known as Sweet’s Catalog. This was a big
influence for the American architects of that time, who today are
considered of relevant importance in architectural history, such as
Albert Frey or the abovementioned Richard Neutra. And as stated by
Neutra himself, while in Europe “much or all of its production had a
‘special’, almost artistic character” (25(25) Neutra, R. (2013). Vida y Forma: Autobiografía de Richard Neutra. Los Angeles: Atara Press.
), in North America, the middle class had many products manufactured industrially for the construction of their houses.
The
Lovell Health House, one of the first made in the USA with a totally
metallic structure, was conceived to be a living machine composed of
standardized pieces that, according to Lamprecht, was “a tribute to the
Sweet’s Catalog” (26(26) Mac Lamprecht, B. (2010). Neutra. Complete works. Cologne: Taschen.
).
The use of catalog elements showed a different way of dealing with the
construction process. The structural component lost importance next to
the catalog elements used. The wall was to be ‘technified’ becoming a
succession of elements finished in the factory that overlap and
juxtapose, composing the different enclosures.
Other lesser-known
projects in which the use of industrialized parts was decisive were the
proposals presented in the General Electric Small House contest
organized nationally in 1935. In them it can be seen that Neutra
contemplated the possibility of interchangeability between the wooden
structure derived from the traditional balloon frame and a structure
made with light metal elements. As he himself explained (27(27) Neutra, R. (undated). Perpetual Comeback. Wood in Building. UCLA Library Collection, Charles E. Young research Library: Richard and Dion Neutra papers, 1925-1970. Unpublished manuscript.
):
True enough the new materials, the steel skeleton, for example, were first to open a fresh vista onto possible use of large glass areas, and the new heating devices now increasingly permit their use without losing control of the room climate. But old venerable wood construction has nevertheless no difficulty of following suit and partaking in the new spirit. The designer in Wood can easily enough divorce himself from a primeval way of thinking.
Even though none of the two proposals presented were built, there are enormous similarities between one of them and a project built a year later for an exhibition, in which he thoroughly developed the construction system proposed in the abovementioned contest. This project is known as Plywood Model House. In this case, he used again a material newly added to the market, plywood, which until that moment could not be used outside. He chose a balloon-type structure with 4-inch squared wooden columns that were prepared with grooves to receive the metal joinery. They were separated between them a distance with coincided with the space needed to install the windows. The result was an anonymous architecture in which the importance dwelled on the simplification of the process derived from the use products supplied straight from the industry and not in the constructive detail. All the possible encounters between the different components were studied and each element fulfilled a specific function within the whole, whose sum’s purpose was the overall efficiency of the system (fig. 04).
Richard
Neutra gradually developed a cataloguing system for the details brought
about, which he used indiscriminately in his projects (28(28) Boesiger, W. (1950). Richard Neutra: Buildings and projects / Réalisations et projects / Bauten und Projekten. Zürich: Editions Girsberger.
).
Far from being innovative and original, in his projects he adapted the
standard details and repeated them constantly. To reduce possible
problems during construction and avoid the need for detailed plans, he
laid down a standard working system, which he resorted to appropriately,
adapting details he had previously used in other projects, achieving
proven optimal solutions. In this way he simplified not only the
building work, but also the design process. The projects became a
succession of correctly catalogued and classified details which
complemented the plans. They achieved an architecture that was the sum
of different compatible and adaptable building systems in which the
construction process could be visualized in the project phase.
2.5. Chauffeur’s House: Flexible tuning.
⌅Friederich
Fröbel was a German pedagogue known for his leading role in children
pedagogy. The influence of his theories and on relevant artists and
architects such as Paul Klee, Wassily Kandinsky, Buckminster Fuller, Le
Corbusier or Frank Lloyd Wright is well-known. For example, Frank Lloyd
Wright from the beginning used a grid that served as a reference in
which to fit the building. The architect of the Prairie Houses
exerted an enormous influence on subsequent generations of, mainly
European, architects. In Holland, for example, these influenced,
unquestionably, some architects of the generation after Berlage, such as
Robert van’t Hoff (29(29) García, R. (2011). Arquitectura moderna en los Países Bajos, 1929 - 1945. Madrid: ediciones Akal.
),
J.J. Oud od Gerrith Th. Rietveld, is unquestionable. All of them
related, to a greater or lesser extent, with De Stijl in which space
played a leading role.
Gerrit Th. Rietveld also showed, since his
beginnings as a cabinet-maker, a positive attitude toward the influence
of mechanization. One of the first consequences to this was the
purification in the forms of the components that he used in his
furniture. It can be seen in the so-called 1908 chair and in the well-known Red-Blue chair (30(30) Baroni, D. (1977). I mobili di Gerrit Thomas Rietveld. Milano: Electa editrice.
).
The way of projecting, which was carried out until that moment only in the production of pieces of furniture, was transferred by Rietveld to three-dimensional construction of grater scale thanks to the Schröder House. And, in 1927, for the first time, Rietveld used prefabricated components for the construction of a house, the Chauffer’s House in Utrecht. These provided a delimitation of space without enclosing it, allowing it to flow between them.
This project, the accommodation for the driver on the garage as part of a larger intervention in which Rietveld had been commissioned to reform and expand the house of H. van de Vuuerts, was conceived as an experiment on the application of industrialization in housing construction. It was a parallelepiped construction in which, on one of the sides, as well as on the roof, a portion of its volume was projected towards the outside, thus breaking the delimiting planes and enhancing the idea of belonging to an unlimited outer space.
In Chaffeur’s House the grid was used to design the plans, elevations and cross sections (fig. 05). In an attempt to achieve a versatile space with different possible distributions (31(31) Küper, M. (2006). Garaje con vivienda para chófer. 2G. Gerrit Th. Rietveld. Casas, 39/40, 76-83.
),
he only used ready-made components that could easily be moved around.
Without forgetting the spatial component as the major feature of this
designs, influenced by the growing trend of industrialization, the
constructional component was given a major role.
Using the grid as a pattern (32(32) Cortés, J. A. (2013). Historia de la retícula en el siglo XX. De la estructura Dom-ino a los comienzos de los años setenta. Valladolid: Secretariado de publicaciones e intercambio editorial.
)
and tuning the space established an initial system of relationships
that structured the space and organized the distribution of the
different environments, i.e. they determined all the possible positions
to place the different constructional elements. The constant use of
modules in the same way and in all directions facilitated the use of
prefabricated components of known dimensions and shapes. This procedure,
far from producing monotonous and repetitive buildings, together with
the use of sliding doors and walls, meant that they could be enormously
flexible with modifiable and adjustable distributions since the
components could be disassembled.
2.6. General Motors in Suïsse. Rigorous gearing.
⌅In the 18th century, the ‘decorative architectur’ and the ‘constructive architecture’, whose specialist of the latter was the new nascent figure of the engineer, had completely disassociated themselves from each other. An obvious example of the division between art and science was what happened in the Tour built by Eiffel. Its imminent construction and conception based on scientific notions generated a great controversy among French artists. The objectivity, typical in the application of scientific criteria, characterized the way of engineer’s proceeded which differed in an ostensible way from the architect’s doing. For engineers, function dictated the resulting form, beauty becoming a consequence of it. A functional form derived from the conditions imposed by material and construction and from the application of rational foundations. Without the need for overlapping decorative elements, these constructions were able to reflect a rational beauty away from preconceived aesthetic rules.
This way of engineering proceeding exerted a powerful influence on the architects of the Neue Sachlichkeit, whose main defenders were in Germany, Switzerland and Holland. And in this context was born the ABC-Beiträge zum Bauen
magazine in whose foundation participated Mart Stam, Hans Schmidt, El
Lissitzky and Emil Roth, architects related to functionalism and Sachlichkeit.
In this publication, for instance, some published articles analyze
architectural projects from a more scientific point of view, such as
construction methods, economy or hygiene. These architects began to
substitute the arbitrary subjectivity of individuals tastes for a
rigorous and objective way of doing things at the service of society and
far from formal stylistics (33(33) Martí Arís, C. and Monteys Roig, X. (1985). La línea dura. 2C: construcción de la ciudad, 22, 2-17.
).
Rudolf Steiger, architect born in Zürich in 1900, also belonged to this group of architects who advocated a useful, rational, functional, accurate and scientific architecture. He designed in 1935, together with the engineer Carl Hubacher, an automobile assembly factory for the European subsidiary of the American company General Motors.
From
the beginning, Rudolf Steiger and Carl Hubacher collaborated with the
engineers of the automotive company. And from the first projection step,
needs and requirements derived from function were considered. This was a
new form of project collaboration where, as Albert Kahn did with the
Ford Company, it was “necessary a cohesion between the work of the
engineers of the production, occupied in the technical definition of the
product, the lines of development and production machines, and that of
the designers to whom the definition of the physical space has been
entrusted” (34(34) Bucci, F. (1991). L’architetto di Ford. Albert Kahn e il progetto della fabbrica moderna. Milano: Città Studio.
).
The due formed by Rudolf Steiger and Carl Hubacher opted to design the new car assembly plant (fig.06)
as a complex with a spacious main building, lots of natural light and
constant ventilation to provide a space worthy of the workers who had to
carry out the monotonous activities of an assembly line (35(35) Arribas-Blanco, R. (2019). La fábrica de ensamblaje de general Motors Suisse in Biel, una construcción funcionalista. Informes de la Construcción, 71 (556): e318. https://doi.org/10.3989/ic.67435
). Leaving all aesthetic considerations to one
side, the load-bearing structure was exposed with no unnecessary
cladding along with the multiple, carefully designed structural elements
with had their profiles reduced to the minimum cross-sectional areas
needed in order to support the loads. The elevation of the constructed
volume was designed allowing natural lighting and an appropriated
acoustics environment to the tasks carried out in its interior.
Different types of transit, whether vehicles, materials or people,
determined the positions of the different activities and the
organization of the bays to rationalize the routes. Economy and
functional efficiency of the whole were the initial premises that gave
rise to the perfect combination of the different components.
Architecture is identified with construction and is understood as a science in which everything must be objective. The architectural project has become a series of facts which are the result of scientific and quantifiable parameters. In a gearing in that everything responds to the creation of a functional whole. Buildings that are designed rigorously and according to precise calculations, economy of means and for a precise function.
3. CONCLUSIONS
⌅The strategies identified can be divided into two clearly different groups: the first refers to the method of producing a certain product, or creating an object, in which the project and execution phases are by necessity a single continuous process, i.e. an unbreakable twosome that includes the first three strategies: reproduction, linking and manufacture. These modes of action generate architectural types from mass-produced components that are almost impossible to combine with others that have not been specially designed for the project. The design tools these strategies use are the 3-D creations of their ideas, which aids are detecting errors at the design stages.
By reproduction the home is considered in the project as an object whose typified form is consciously studied in order to be reproducible. Hand-made models are used to study and perfect the product’s final configuration before it is mass produced in large quantities by machines. By linking is generated a transformable 3-dimensional structure that continuously envelops the created space. This method uses models to distribute the different components around the space and have greater control of their exact position. It makes use of previously-conceived and carefully designed elements, considering the versatility of the engendered system whose success depends on the way the pieces are joined together. By manufacture structures are erected whose configuration is dictated by their efficiency and materials. This strategy resorts to the used of full-scale prototypes of the actual materials to be used, since their specific characteristics will decide the final form of the product and guarantee its efficiency and good behavior.
On the other hand, strategies that use new design tools that organize the elements in different ways belong to the second group. In these, where assembly, tuning and gearing are included, the project phase is the most important and it is independent of the subsequent execution process. They make use of standardized components from away different suppliers, all of which are interchangeable. In other words, the organization of previously defined elements is planned by means of different project rules.
In assembly, buildings are obtained from a series of standard units that can be dismantled. Catalogues are used in this project strategy and the results obtained become the sum of previously tested and rehearsed construction systems and components that can be adapted to any project. In tuning, projects are designed with flexible and widely variable layouts that can easily be changed from one position to another according to requirements. The space is modulated to create a template in which to fit the standard elements. In gearing, buildings are constructed in which absolutely all components fit exactly within a categoric and harmonious whole designed for a specific function that would not be easily adaptable to any other. Scientific parameters are used in this strategy to place the elements so as to guarantee the precise operation of the building this created. The types of architecture produced by these three strategies can be identified with different degrees of prefabrication, with those designed by tuning being more adaptable and variable than those resulting from gearing, which due to being designed for a specific function are much more difficult to adapt to other ends.
The above descriptions can be summed up by saving that technological progress influenced the practice of architecture through two complementary dimensions. Firstly, as an external factor that modified process directly related to the production of defined objects, today known as closed prefabrication. The second is the internal factor that changed the way of understanding the forces that govern internally the order or organization of the elements, identified with open prefabrication. In other words, industrialization and scientific progress affected both the shape of the constructed object and the organization of its components.
Writing this research has made possible to ratify the creative possibilities inherent in materializing ideas. The manner of reproduction, linking, manufacturing, assembly, tuning and gearing has itself become an instrument of design with a creative novelty of first order. Six different project strategies by which architects can manipulate industrially produced materials while following diverse aims and criteria. Six different ways of approaching the interdependence of form and construction. Six different design tools that emphasize the plurality of an epoch in which the architect has stopped playing the role of conformist actor in order to take his own creative decisions, ignoring pre-established dogmas and using new linguistic codes in harmony with the times. Six different strategies with which Muche and Paulick, Wachsmann, Prouvé, Neutra, Rietveld and Steiger, each from a different standpoint, showed the way forward. The fundamental interest of these design strategies lay in the fact that they were authentic creative tools in which any pre-established formalism was rejected and the creative attitude could be extrapolated to construct a modern discourse far removed from the emphasis on aesthetics qualities restricted to space and form.